Attention all Knifemakers!.....Product dealers/retailers and/or knife makers/sharpeners/hobbyists (etc) are not permitted to insert business related text/videos/images (company/company name/product references) and/or links into your signature line, your homepage url (within the homepage profile box), within any posts, within your avatar, nor anywhere else on this site. Market research (such as asking questions regarding or referring to products/services that you make/offer for sale or posting pictures of finished projects) is prohibited. These features are reserved for supporting vendors and hobbyists.....Also, there is no need to announce to the community that you are a knifemaker unless you're trying to sell something so please refrain from sharing.
Thanks for your co-operation!

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Freedom of speech, as it is applied by the First Amendment, only protects the speaker from GOVERNMENT, i.e., the MAN, the FUZZ, and in some instances the PUBLIC SCHOOLS from taking any action against you, unless there is clear and present danger. GOVERNMENT can limit speech very narrowly, in certain time, place manner, if there is interest in public safety. GOVERNMENT can limit speech through the airwaves (FCC) if it is found indecent or pornographic. Speech can be found in many forms and as the courts sees fit (burning the flag). (Off topic, but we need to start burning the Iranian flag)

Otherwise, in the other parts on non GOVERNMENTAL action, speech can be met with lawful repercussions.

GOVERNMENT can limit speech very narrowly, in certain time, place manner, if there is interest in public safety. (Off topic, but we need to start burning the Iranian flag)

Constitution of the United States (Bill of Rights): Amendment I: Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech ...

US Patriot Act: Freedom of speech: The government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation. "Anyone"? Does this also include local law enforcement agencies? A clergyman, in confidence?

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers may sometimes be prosecuted for tolerating "hate speech" by their employees, if that speech contributes to a broader pattern of harassment resulting in a "hostile or offensive working environment" for other employees. Pretty vague, huh?

Why only the Iranian flag? What criteria does a nation have to meet to get on the list to have its flag burned? Shouldn't we really be starting with the UN flag?

Though I could not caution all I still might warn a few; Don't raise your hand to raise no flag atop no ship of fools. - Robert Hunter

I told myself I'd unplug my keyboard and stop drinking. But I didn't.
I'm kind of over the hill, and semi-illiterate in matters internet, so I was unaware that comments I posted on newspaper websites would be visible worldwide. I was shocked to see my own photo in "comments" when I took a look at a Tokyo paper's story on Aaron Bassler . . .
Nevertheless. I could not refrain this morning from commenting on the latest developments, as the reporter was good enough to follow up on the story, despite the tone of my entreaties.
The Mendocino County DA is looking into the matter, a "matter of protocol", he said. Wonder how that will work out . .
Eleven rounds fired, seven hit Bassler, without warning, from 60 yards out (used to be 40). "His finger was near the trigger". Justifiable homicide says a professor in Sacramento, from whence the shooters came.
Another schizophrenic bites the dust.

No, little sympathy, and I'd hate to be telling this story in a bar in Ft. Bragg tonight.
Nevertheless, he was effectively executed by a team from Sacramento shooting from tree stands at a range of of approximately 50 yards, without warning or challenge.

Anyhow at the risk of sounding political (which I am not). I used to follow politics a lot, and was even a voter registration specialist by trade, but now I have chosen never to vote again. It got me too worked up and kept me away from wasting time on knives.

So here is my observation. I never could understand my friends that were always talking about the 2nd amendment and their right to bear arms and then also being against burning the flag. Regardless of what the constitution actually says (on the right to bear arms and free speech), the idea that many of my army buds had was the our guns were there to fight our government if they ever tried to take away our rights. Ok, fine. But then if that situation does come up in which citizens are taking up arms against their own government, wouldn't that tyrannical government also be using the American flag? It always seemed to me that if a person justifies their gun for this possible tyranny, they should also reserve the flag burning right in case of that same possible tyranny.

Anyhow, please don't take (or turn this) into political chatter. It was just an observation and something I never quite understood. And I am not going to sign this with my first initial just in case the NSA is listening. Btw, I know the head of the NSA, Gen. Alexander. Watch out you guys.

There is a cult of ignorance in the United States...nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” -- Isaac Asimov

US Patriot Act: Freedom of speech: The government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation. "Anyone"? Does this also include local law enforcement agencies? A clergyman, in confidence?

Probably can under national security/clear and present danger doctrine. Court will have to decide.

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers may sometimes be prosecuted for tolerating "hate speech" by their employees, if that speech contributes to a broader pattern of harassment resulting in a "hostile or offensive working environment" for other employees. Pretty vague, huh?

Probably can, because it is a tortious activity to allow harassment of employee. I think it goes outside of speech law into what an Employer has a duty to do which is to protect employees. EEOC can regulate workplace environment.

Why only the Iranian flag? What criteria does a nation have to meet to get on the list to have its flag burned? Shouldn't we really be starting with the UN flag?

The way I look at it, a flag is just another piece of cloth...like the Shroud of Turin or a pair of panties.
And I don't give a rat's ass about the NSA, FBI, CIA, DEA, BATF or any of the other USA, Inc. goon squads.

Though I could not caution all I still might warn a few; Don't raise your hand to raise no flag atop no ship of fools. - Robert Hunter